MyTechnologyCompany.com

More than a few times, I have criticized companies that immediately send out cease and desist letters when their intellectual property is being used on the internet without their permission (I'm talking about you, Ford and Nintendo). I have even recommended companies proactively create a public use policy around their IP to help fans understand how they can engage with their favorite brands.
So, it is really nice to be able to highlight an example of a company that gets the opportunity these situations present and the destruction cause by immediately going legal on every unauthorized use of IP. Here is an interview with Atari executive vice president of online and mobile, Tom Kozik. Atari faced the issue of people, who have an affinity for the classic Atari games, creating imitations of their popular games (some not so great) and distributing them on fileshare networks. Rather than following the disturbing trend of sending C&D letters to the fileshare and the individuals distributing the games, Atari decided to engage them and offer legitimate versions of the games to distribute. Tom explains his position perfectly:

Truth be told, why in the world would I ever want to go after my fans? These are people who absolutely love our classic old arcade games...Now, instead of arming up a cadre of lawyers the smart thing to do is say, "Look, you're fans of our games, let us give you the legitimate version of the game,"

Nintendo falls into the ranks of companies who find ways to alienate fans in the name of brand protection. Nintendo has the luxury of having a brand so compelling to their fans that they want to make stories about the brand. In this case some lovers of the Zelda video game series created a movie based on the characters and gave it away for free.

A classic example of how new technologies of the internet will force companies to rethink their preconceptions on how to manage brand. Here is a site of Ford Mustang enthusiasts who put together a calendar of pictures of their favorite member cars. Ford's lawyers have notified the internet company that offers the printing services, Cafe Press, that they must cease printing the calendar as the shots of the Mustangs violate Ford's Trademarks. Now technically they are correct. In the past, people would try to mass print calendars of automobiles (or create toys) and try to distribute them through retail stores. Ford is obligated to protect their trademarks and would take action to make them stop.

Now, today's internet and printing technologies have thrown a wrinkle into this strategy - the emergence of print on demand shops on the internet that enables people to connect and socialize in ways we could not dream of 15 years ago. These technologies are changing the game of brand management. As Jeremy Owyang astutely points out, the internet is causing brands to become decentralized. Our customers are taking ownership of our brand identity! This lack of control can be quite scary for traditional companies, but they need to consider the power of it. Nothing, and I mean nothing, will reinforce a brand identity like its customers promoting it. Real customers talking about and acting out what the brand means to them will resonate with potential customers in a way that no amount of prime time advertising will accomplish (think about Harely Davidson tattoos). Companies just need the leadership to let go.

There are some legal issues around this strategy. The law says that a owner of a trademark must always control its trademark. It also puts a positive obligation to enforce its trademark rights. Failure to do these things can result in the company losing the trademark. While there is no knowing how the courts would actually rule, a solution may be to have a public permission to use the brand in products subject to certain rules (doesn't reflect poorly on the brand, limits on sales, or profits must go to charity, etc.). These published rules could demonstrate that the company still controls its brand. It could still take action on any act that violates those rules. Might this policy have unintended consequences? Maybe. But at least it considers the technological realities of our society rather than create PR nightmares with a companies most devoted fans. Any thoughts on where brand management is headed in this area or what we should be doing?